We’re having a blast with rt (cust svc isn’t), but one thing we’ve run
into is that when a ticket is opened and the emails start flying back
and forth, the “To:” line is from the rt queue (as expected). However,
if a user doesn’t have a signature in the message of his body, via email
there is no way to know who sent the mail. With 5 or 6 cc’s on a ticket,
this gets confusing.
Is there a token I could use in a correspondence template to indicate
the contents of the “To:” line in the message header?
Cheers,
— Gavin Adams
Promisant Ltd.
Bermuda
We’re having a blast with rt (cust svc isn’t), but one thing we’ve run
Meaning that customer service is having issues with RT? What sort of issues?
into is that when a ticket is opened and the emails start flying back
and forth, the “To:” line is from the rt queue (as expected). However,
if a user doesn’t have a signature in the message of his body, via email
there is no way to know who sent the mail. With 5 or 6 cc’s on a ticket,
this gets confusing.
Is there a token I could use in a correspondence template to indicate
the contents of the “To:” line in the message header?
Do you mean the From: header?
What I’d recommend is to have the first line of your template be
RT-Sender: {$Transaction->CreatorObj->EmailAddress}
(note that you need two newlines between headers in the template
and the message body.
Cheers,
— Gavin Adams
Promisant Ltd.
Bermuda
rt-users mailing list
rt-users@lists.fsck.com
http://lists.fsck.com/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
http://www.bestpractical.com/products/rt – Trouble Ticketing. Free.
“GA” == Gavin Adams writes:
GA> if a user doesn’t have a signature in the message of his body, via email
GA> there is no way to know who sent the mail. With 5 or 6 cc’s on a ticket,
GA> this gets confusing.
If your users have their name set in their personal config (ie, when
you created the users, did you enter their names?) then RT shows that
on the From line as part of the address comment.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jesse Vincent [mailto:jesse@bestpractical.com]
We’re having a blast with rt (cust svc isn’t), but one thing we’ve
run
Meaning that customer service is having issues with RT? What sort of
issues?
They have to work now. 
Before, accountability for customer requests
was hard to track. The manager of the department is very happy with RT.
He also is now an open source proponent, where before if it didn’t have
the word MS or Oracle in it…
Is there a token I could use in a correspondence template to
indicate
the contents of the “To:” line in the message header?
Do you mean the From: header?
Long day. Yeah, the From: header.
What I’d recommend is to have the first line of your template be
RT-Sender: {$Transaction->CreatorObj->EmailAddress}
(note that you need two newlines between headers in the template
and the message body.
Work’s like charm. Thanks Jesse,
— Gavin
-----Original Message-----
From: Vivek Khera [mailto:khera@kcilink.com]
“GA” == Gavin Adams writes:
GA> if a user doesn’t have a signature in the message of his body, via
email
GA> there is no way to know who sent the mail. With 5 or 6 cc’s on a
ticket,
GA> this gets confusing.
If your users have their name set in their personal config (ie, when
you created the users, did you enter their names?) then RT shows that
on the From line as part of the address comment.
Only our customer service and tech staff are familiar with the web
interface. What normally happens is an approval is needed from senior
management on a ticket. These users are added as one-off’s as watchers
or CC’s. They respond to tickets via email only (never use the web
interface), and normally do not have a signature. When two PHB’s start
to talk back and forth, confusions reigns supreme.
There is a header for RT-Originator, but certain mail clients (Outlook)
filter those out when viewing the messages. Jesse’s previous message is
working. I’ll probably toss that and some other info into 1-2 line sig
on the internal ticket queues first and see what the response is from
everyone.
Thanks,
— Gavin